Drivers Oppose Motion to Dismiss Jeep Recall ‘Fix’ Class Action

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Two plaintiffs are asking a California federal judge to reject a bid by FCA US LLC to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging a purported “fix” for Jeeps that reportedly rolled away while parked actually created a new defect, reduced the functionality of the vehicles and reduced their value.

Plaintiffs Lynn Grimstad and Mara Manuel claim that a software fix as part of an FCA recall intended to keep certain Jeep vehicles from slipping into neutral actually resulted in the vehicles being unable to enter low-gear four-wheel drive.

According to the FCA class action lawsuit, some 2005 through 2010 model year Jeep Grand Cherokees and 2006 through 2010 model year Jeep Commanders equipped with the Quadra-Drive II or Quadra-Trac II four-wheel drive systems could randomly shift into neutral when stopped, causing the vehicle to roll away while parked.

The FCA class action lawsuit accuses the motor company of cutting corners during its May 2013 recall of nearly 300,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Jeep Commander vehicles that allegedly shifted into neutral without the driver’s intervention.

The plaintiffs allege FCA knew that the software fix would have detrimental effects but continued with the recall instead of spending the substantial amount of money required to actually repair the original defect.

U.S. District Judge James V. Selna initially sent the FCA class action lawsuit to New York bankruptcy court because he believed it would be a better venue for determining FCA’s liability. In November, the bankruptcy judge sent the case back to California federal court because the plaintiffs’ claims relate to events that occurred after FCA purchased Chrysler.

Last month, FCA filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ amended Jeep recall class action lawsuit, arguing that they failed to show how the new defects that arose after the “fix” affected the functionality of their vehicles or presented any safety hazards.

The plaintiffs maintain that their amended FCA class action lawsuit makes specific allegations about the vehicles’ purported loss of function because it states that the 2013 recall made it so that their vehicles no longer performed as designed. They claim that they don’t need to prove anything other than loss of value, and say that some vehicles sold than less than they would have sold if not for the new defect.

Further, they claim that, in their efforts to fix the new defects, they incurred out-of-pocket costs.

A hearing has been scheduled for May 10.

Grimstad and Manuel are represented by Anthony O. Egbase and Sedoo A. Manu of A.O.E. Law and Associates.

The FCA Jeep Recall Class Action Lawsuit is Lynn Grimstad, et al. v. FCA US LLC, et al., Case No. 8:16-cv-00763, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.